G
Gandalf Grey
Guest
Oil Traders Fear US Attack on Iran
By Dave Lindorff
Created Mar 29 2007 - 9:52am
Okay, now I'm worried.
There have been several rounds of reports that the war-obsessed Bush
administration was getting ready to attack Iran--first last September, then
in December, and more recently in January and February.
The one thing that kept me thinking that a catastrophic war with Iran might
not be in the offing was oil prices, which didn't seem to be acting as one
would expect them to if there were a major war looming in the Persian Gulf.
Oil prices, in fact, have been drifting slowly downward since September
2006, when they hit $68.85. Yet if there were going to be a hot war between
the U.S. and Iran, one would expect much higher prices. After all, most of
the combat would be occurring along Iran's heavily armed coastline and in
the Gulf, through which over a quarter of all the world's oil passes. In the
event of such a conflict, oil shipments would shut down from that region as
underwriters jacked the price of insuring oil tankers in the Gulf to
astronomical levels. Estimates of how expensive oil could become in the
event of a US attack on Iran, the world's second largest oil producing
nation, have ranged as high as $200/barrel--a level that would bring the
global economy to a screeching halt.
Well, there are new reports circulating now that an attack by US air and
naval forces could come in early April, and this time, the oil traders are
taking them seriously. On Tuesday, oil futures shot up $5/barrel to hit
$68/barrel--quite a jump, and the highest price for oil since last
September.
Reports say that traders were responding to rumors--unsubstantiated--that
Iran had fired on an American ship in the Gulf, and no doubt also to the
ongoing tensions over Iran's capture and detention of 15 British sailors,
whom it claims had illegally entered Iranian territorial waters.
Phil Flynn, a trader with Alaron Trading in Chicago, was quoted as saying
that the oil market has been "on pins and needles" because of the tensions
in the Persian Gulf between the US and Iran.
Adding to worries about oil supplies from the Gulf, no doubt, is the vast
armada that the U.S. has amassed up close to Iran's borders--an armada that
includes two fully armed aircraft battle groups, equipped with hundreds of
strike aircraft and tomahawk cruise missiles and capable of delivering a
crippling blow to Iran's military and industrial infrastructure.
The Bush administration, while repeatedly insisting it has no plans to
attack Iran, has pointedly also stated on numerous occasions that "all
options are on the table" in dealing with what it claims are Iraqi efforts
to develop nuclear weapons capability. The White House and Pentagon have
also been running a propaganda campaign--ominously reminiscent of the run-up
to the Iraq invasion--of trying to make a case that Iran is providing
technical aid, weapons and training to Iraqi insurgents, particularly in the
use of armor-penetrating explosive devices.
Iran, for its part, is continuing to develop its uranium refining skills and
capacity, all the while denying that it has any plans to develop nuclear
weapons. This past week, the United Nations voted stiffer sanctions on Iran
for failing to bring its nuclear program into compliance with international
rules and monitoring.
Iran denies that it has been aiding Iraqi insurgents or providing advanced
weapons for use against US forces in Iraq, and indeed the evidence presented
by the U.S. has been viewed with considerable skepticism.
Meanwhile, there are reports in the European press that American forces are
massing along the Iraq border with Iran, even as the U.S. is conducting war
games in the Gulf simulating an attack on Iran. There have also been reports
for some time that US special forces have been operating in Iran, gathering
intelligence and establishing coordinates on likely bombing targets, and
perhaps linking with anti-government groups inside Iran that have been
conducting terror attacks there. More recently there have been reports that
the Bush administration has been using misappropriated Iraq reconstruction
funds to finance Kurdish and Al Qaeda group attacks inside Iran.
Back in the U.S., the Bush administration succeeded in getting Congress to
back off of attempts to include legislation barring the White House from
attacking Iran without prior Congressional approval. Bush has already
claimed that Iran is a terrorist nation and that he thus has the authority
to attack that country at will because of the 2001 Congressional
Authorization for Use of Military Force which was actually an authorization
for the US attack on the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.
It all would seem to point to the real possibility of an attack on Iran--a
move that would be a war crime, that would be a disaster for the U.S., that
would spark a global recession, and that would inflame the entire Middle
East for years to come.
Do the oil traders know something that we in America should be knowing?
And why aren't Congress and the US media discussing all this?
_______
--
NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not
always been authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material
available to advance understanding of
political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. I
believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107
"A little patience and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their
spells dissolve, and the people recovering their true sight, restore their
government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are
suffering deeply in spirit,
and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public
debt. But if the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have
patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning
back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at
stake."
-Thomas Jefferson
By Dave Lindorff
Created Mar 29 2007 - 9:52am
Okay, now I'm worried.
There have been several rounds of reports that the war-obsessed Bush
administration was getting ready to attack Iran--first last September, then
in December, and more recently in January and February.
The one thing that kept me thinking that a catastrophic war with Iran might
not be in the offing was oil prices, which didn't seem to be acting as one
would expect them to if there were a major war looming in the Persian Gulf.
Oil prices, in fact, have been drifting slowly downward since September
2006, when they hit $68.85. Yet if there were going to be a hot war between
the U.S. and Iran, one would expect much higher prices. After all, most of
the combat would be occurring along Iran's heavily armed coastline and in
the Gulf, through which over a quarter of all the world's oil passes. In the
event of such a conflict, oil shipments would shut down from that region as
underwriters jacked the price of insuring oil tankers in the Gulf to
astronomical levels. Estimates of how expensive oil could become in the
event of a US attack on Iran, the world's second largest oil producing
nation, have ranged as high as $200/barrel--a level that would bring the
global economy to a screeching halt.
Well, there are new reports circulating now that an attack by US air and
naval forces could come in early April, and this time, the oil traders are
taking them seriously. On Tuesday, oil futures shot up $5/barrel to hit
$68/barrel--quite a jump, and the highest price for oil since last
September.
Reports say that traders were responding to rumors--unsubstantiated--that
Iran had fired on an American ship in the Gulf, and no doubt also to the
ongoing tensions over Iran's capture and detention of 15 British sailors,
whom it claims had illegally entered Iranian territorial waters.
Phil Flynn, a trader with Alaron Trading in Chicago, was quoted as saying
that the oil market has been "on pins and needles" because of the tensions
in the Persian Gulf between the US and Iran.
Adding to worries about oil supplies from the Gulf, no doubt, is the vast
armada that the U.S. has amassed up close to Iran's borders--an armada that
includes two fully armed aircraft battle groups, equipped with hundreds of
strike aircraft and tomahawk cruise missiles and capable of delivering a
crippling blow to Iran's military and industrial infrastructure.
The Bush administration, while repeatedly insisting it has no plans to
attack Iran, has pointedly also stated on numerous occasions that "all
options are on the table" in dealing with what it claims are Iraqi efforts
to develop nuclear weapons capability. The White House and Pentagon have
also been running a propaganda campaign--ominously reminiscent of the run-up
to the Iraq invasion--of trying to make a case that Iran is providing
technical aid, weapons and training to Iraqi insurgents, particularly in the
use of armor-penetrating explosive devices.
Iran, for its part, is continuing to develop its uranium refining skills and
capacity, all the while denying that it has any plans to develop nuclear
weapons. This past week, the United Nations voted stiffer sanctions on Iran
for failing to bring its nuclear program into compliance with international
rules and monitoring.
Iran denies that it has been aiding Iraqi insurgents or providing advanced
weapons for use against US forces in Iraq, and indeed the evidence presented
by the U.S. has been viewed with considerable skepticism.
Meanwhile, there are reports in the European press that American forces are
massing along the Iraq border with Iran, even as the U.S. is conducting war
games in the Gulf simulating an attack on Iran. There have also been reports
for some time that US special forces have been operating in Iran, gathering
intelligence and establishing coordinates on likely bombing targets, and
perhaps linking with anti-government groups inside Iran that have been
conducting terror attacks there. More recently there have been reports that
the Bush administration has been using misappropriated Iraq reconstruction
funds to finance Kurdish and Al Qaeda group attacks inside Iran.
Back in the U.S., the Bush administration succeeded in getting Congress to
back off of attempts to include legislation barring the White House from
attacking Iran without prior Congressional approval. Bush has already
claimed that Iran is a terrorist nation and that he thus has the authority
to attack that country at will because of the 2001 Congressional
Authorization for Use of Military Force which was actually an authorization
for the US attack on the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.
It all would seem to point to the real possibility of an attack on Iran--a
move that would be a war crime, that would be a disaster for the U.S., that
would spark a global recession, and that would inflame the entire Middle
East for years to come.
Do the oil traders know something that we in America should be knowing?
And why aren't Congress and the US media discussing all this?
_______
--
NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not
always been authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material
available to advance understanding of
political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. I
believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107
"A little patience and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their
spells dissolve, and the people recovering their true sight, restore their
government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are
suffering deeply in spirit,
and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public
debt. But if the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have
patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning
back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at
stake."
-Thomas Jefferson
